tk_publish

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses path storage, browsability with Local File Storage, auto-creation of publish type, and auto-derivation of step/entity. However, it lacks details on idempotency and overwrite behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise with two clear paragraphs, front-loading the purpose and then explaining modes. Every sentence adds value, and there is no redundant information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity (multiple parameters, two modes, interaction with Toolkit templates), the description covers key aspects like mode differentiation and path handling. It is sufficient for effective use, especially with the detailed input schema and presence of an output schema.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Although the context signals indicate 0% schema coverage, the actual schema has rich descriptions for each parameter. The tool description adds context about modes but does not supplement parameter details beyond what the schema provides, leading to a baseline score of 3.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states 'Publish a file to ShotGrid' and distinguishes two modes of operation, making the verb and resource specific. It differentiates from sibling tools by focusing on publishing, which is a distinct action among the listed siblings.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explains when to use each mode (with or without PipelineConfiguration) and suggests using tk_resolve_path first for the former. It provides clear context but does not explicitly exclude alternatives like sg_create.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.